4.5 Article

Selection of methodology to assess food intake

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 56, 期 -, 页码 S25-S32

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601426

关键词

dietary methodology; 24 h recall; dietary records; food frequency questionnaire; dietary history; validity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of the EFCOSUM project was to develop a method to estimate both acute and usual consumption levels in European countries and for the sake of comparison, a common basic method for dietary assessment was needed. The method should allow a reliable comparison of the intake of relevant dietary indicators among large population groups. Design and results: The selection of methodology was based on the available literature and the expertise of the participants. To guide the selection process, decision trees containing all relevant moments of choice, alternatives and criteria for the selection of a method for food consumption measurement were developed. Considering that insight into average food and nutrient intake and their distribution in well-defined groups of individuals was important, it was decided that for the monitoring of the selected dietary indicators food consumption data should be collected at an individual level. Different methods were reviewed (24 h recall, dietary record, food frequency questionnaire, dietary history method). Conclusions: Since the 24 h recall method is applicable in large European populations of different ethnicity, has a relatively low respondent and interviewer burden, is open-ended and is cost-effective, this method can be considered as the best method for EFCOSUM to get population mean intakes and distributions for subjects aged 10 y and over in different European countries. Usual intake should be estimated by statistical modelling techniques, using two non-consecutive 24 h recalls and a food list to assess the proportion non-users for infrequently consumed foods. Sponsorship: European Commission, DG SDANCO F/3, Health Monitoring Programme.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据